dec 4th, 2010
i agree. more states is a dumb idea.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Girish |
The proposed creation of Telangana will only add to the country''s woes without solving any of its problems. We need to find out ways to unite the people and not divide them," RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat told a function organised by the outfit''s ''Kashi Prant'' unit here.
| The record of smaller states is not very encouraging to justify the promotion of the smaller state idea. More states will mean more non-plan expenditure which is non-productive and burdening the common man. Already the lion's share of the state revenue is spent on the luxurious life of the political class and bureaucracy and the rest going to payment of salary, allowances and the security of our rulers. The spending on welfare of the people and development is already negligible. More the administrative paraphernalia, more the burden and deficit of the states on the centre. | |
5 comments:
As I wrote in this forum some time ago, the formation of Telangana is very likely to lead to severe security problems for the country, both from the Reds and the Greens. Hyderabad will in all likelihood become a UT or a state and it is fraught with dangerous consequences for the stability and survival of India as one nation. A common person like me has thought out the consequences but not the stupid BJP party. I can’t understand this; (can someone explain it for me?) on one hand RSS is against the formation of Telangana and on the other, the BJP is dying to make Telangana happen.
Ahead of the all-party meeting on the Telangana issue tomorrow, the security establishment is learnt to have made it known to the political leadership that smaller states have so far only benefited the Maoists and this should be factored in while taking any such step in Andhra Pradesh.
In discussions at the highest level over the past couple of days, top government sources said the assessment from security agencies is that carving out Telengana would help Maoists regroup in the Andhra region.
“Remnants of the Maoist movement are strongest in Telengana so any break-up of the state (Andhra) will help them,” said a source.
I disagree, I think more states is a good idea, because it offers more choice to the people. As for security, nobody ever opposed formation of Chattisgarh and Jharkhand based on security, even though both ended up infested with Maoist insurgency. From what I see, Muslims have traditionally opposed formation of Telangana.
Anything that can allow the competent and the incompetent to separate from each other - and the opportunity for choice usually does - will mean a better future for all.
The RSS is generally right about most issues, but I respectfully disagree on this one. Telangana is a just cause
and in general, states the size of the proposed Telangana would be a better managed unit of governance.
The points about national security etc need to be considered, but one must remember that united AP hardly covered itself with glory in that respect.
Kkkaangress encouraged armed Maoists to roam around the state capital and allowed vast areas of the state to come under de facto Maoist control.
Chandrababu Naidu and his TDP made an electoral promise of reservations for Muslims. The Congress under Samuel Reddy actually delivered on that commitment!
And doled out a subsidy for the unheard of Christist Haj to Bethlehem! Not to forget how Muslim terrorists from Gujarat were allowed to use AP as a base and the state government's non-cooperation with police operations by Gujarat police against Muslim terrorists in AP.
So, united Andhra Pradesh has hardly been a sterling example of national security etc.
Besides, the RSS is not infallible either. Much as I hate to say it, poor judgement is apparent in the choice of Nitin Gadkari as BJP President, Gopinath Munde as Deputy leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha and Sushma Swaraj as leader of the opposition. These individuals do not inspire much confidence in the party's core constituency. The former two are utterly inarticulate and Sushma's commitment to the ideology of cultural nationalism is questionable.
Post a Comment